Hill v. State, CR
| Decision Date | 04 May 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 728 S.W.2d 510,292 Ark. 144 |
| Parties | Steven D. HILL, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 85-212. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
This matter is before us on a petition for permission to proceed under A.R.Cr.P. Rule 37. The appellant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. His conviction was appealed to this Court and affirmed in Hill v. State, 289 Ark. 387, 713 S.W.2d 233 (1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1101, 107 S.Ct. 1331, 94 L.Ed.2d 182 (1987). The petition seeks permission to proceed under Rule 37 on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel, at both the guilt phase and penalty phase of the trial.
In order to be entitled to proceed pursuant to Rule 37 the petitioner must show that defense counsel was not only ineffective, but that such ineffectiveness deprived him of a fair trial and produced an outcome which cannot be relied on as just. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). There is a strong presumption that the conduct of defense counsel is within the range of reasonable professional assistance. Allegations of mistakes in trial tactics and strategy are not normally grounds upon which we can grant post-conviction relief. Leasure v. State, 254 Ark. 961, 497 S.W.2d 1 (1973). Mere error or unsound advice do not necessarily require a new trial. Hayes v. State, 280 Ark. 509, 660 S.W.2d 648 (1983).
The first allegation concerning ineffective assistance of counsel is that counsel failed to file a motion to prohibit the state from seeking the death penalty because it is disproportionately imposed when the victim is white. This type motion is based upon the theory that blacks are disproportionately sentenced to death when the victim is white. The United States Supreme Court has recently rejected this argument. See McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279, 107 S.Ct. 1756, 95 L.Ed.2d 262. Moreover, in the present case, both petitioner and the victim were white.
The second allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel is the failure to call witnesses in the penalty phase of the trial. Petitioner states that certain named witnesses would have "presented the varying conduct and circumstances of Hills' upbringing and current age for the jury to properly weigh the mitigating factor." Included among these witnesses was Dr. Roy Ragsdill, a psychologist, who would have testified that he diagnosed Hill as having an antisocial personality disorder. The objective in reviewing an assertion of ineffective assistance of counsel concerning the failure to call certain witnesses is to determine whether this failure resulted in actual prejudice which denied petitioner a fair trial. Isom v. State, 284 Ark. 426, 682 S.W.2d 755 (1985). The thrust of this argument was to emphasize the youthfulness of the petitioner. The petitioner's age was already before the jury. The petitioner has failed to state what the witnesses would have testified to if called, or explained why this testimony would have been important. Therefore, this allegation of ineffectiveness is not sufficient to cast doubt on the outcome of the trial.
The chief argument on the above assertion is that it cannot be determined whether prejudice resulted from the failure to call...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robertson v. State
...713 S.W.2d 233, cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1101, 107 S.Ct. 1331, 94 L.Ed.2d 182 (1986), petition for postconviction relief denied, 292 Ark. 144, 728 S.W.2d 510 (1987). We also upheld the death penalty in the unusual case of Franz v. State, 296 Ark. 181, 754 S.W.2d 839 (1988). Ronald Gene Simmon......
-
Hill v. Lockhart, PB-C-92-240.
...1331, 94 L.Ed.2d 182 (1987). He subsequently filed a Rule 37 request for post-conviction relief, which was denied. Hill v. State, 292 Ark. 144, 728 S.W.2d 510 (1987). Review was again denied by the Supreme Court of the United States. 484 U.S. 873, 108 S.Ct. 208, 98 L.Ed.2d 159 Hill then fil......
-
Missildine v. State, CR
...are not grounds for a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel. Burnett v. State, 310 Ark. 202, 832 S.W.2d 848 (1992); Hill v. State, 292 Ark. 144, 728 S.W.2d 510, cert. den. 479 U.S. 1101, 107 S.Ct. 1331, 94 L.Ed.2d 182 Missildine has failed to show that the trial court's ruling was cl......
-
Goodwin v. State, CR 06-612 (Ark. 3/22/2007)
...is to determine whether this failure resulted in actual prejudice which denied the petitioner a fair trial. Hill v. State, 292 Ark. 144, 728 S.W.2d 510 (1987) (per curiam). An attorney's decision not to call a particular witness is largely a matter of professional judgment, and the fact tha......